euroVote: copyright and patents

Suggestion of what to do with this site:

If you are against patent and copyright "expansion", print the intro, national party policy, your region's replies and MEP vote analysis and put it somewhere that people will read before voting... maybe make some of it into a leaflet... even leafletting just your street will make some difference;

If you want patent or copyright expansion, you'll probably want to edit the site and use the data sources to prepare your own version. I try to be unbiased, but I'd bet I'm not neutral enough. That's fine by me. Tell me your work and I'll link to it;

euroVote: introduction

UK MEP elections are on 10 June. Please vote wisely.
I would like you to think about the EU's role in copyrights
and patents when you do.

Why are copyrights and patents important?

Both of these affect private individuals and companies more than ever before
because computers play increasing roles in our lives.
Even "digital satellite" television receivers are basically computers, so
recording from it may involve copying by a computer.

Copyright

a monopoly on acts like copying granted to the author of a work;

usually to encourage creation of new works;

some copying is permitted by law;

There is pressure to limit the amount of permitted copying by
increasing "enforcement" and "forbidding circumvention";

"enforcement" often means that copyright holders can challenge or search you to prove you aren't copying;

"forbidding circumvention" means that if a computer only allows you to copy things with explicit permission from the copyright holder (usually requiring payment), you may not force it to copy, even if copying would otherwise be permitted by law. Also, telling anyone how to force it may be illegal!

Patents

monopolies on particular ideas, usually mechanical processes;

usually to encourage innovation in a field;

some things not patentable (example: mathematical methods);

unapproved use of a patented idea forbidden, regardless of how it is expressed;

approval usually involves payment of some kind;

There is pressure to allow patenting of software;

satisfying all patent holders would be a considerable new burden on independent software developers;

no shortage of innovative software, so why allow patenting it?

software is mathematical and should be not patentable.

Why are MEPs important?

EU directives often trigger production of UK laws.
Stopping poor EU directives is a key step to stopping poor UK laws.
The MEPs must agree with a directive for it to pass.
Electing MEPs who represent our views is vital!

How should I vote?

I would like you to support those who are opposed to
further copyright enforcement laws and software patents,
but I try to report all data without bias.
You may find that the type or lack of replies from candidates
also helps you to decide.

euroVote: National Parties

In general, MEPs follow their party line instead of acting independently.
If they are not listed on a regional page, they followed the party line given here and did not answer any questions sent to them, as far as I know.

Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat

All three parties voted for SWPAT and for IPRED, with
some "rebels" who are noted on their regional pages.
Liberal Democrat policy is against SWPAT,
according to FFII-UK.

What is a "national brain"?

The three largest parties seemed to appoint one MEP
to decide on these issues,
so you might like to look at their regions and replies.
Conservatives deferred to Malcolm Harbour (West Midlands),
Labour deferred to Arlene McCarthy (North West),
Lib Dems deferred to Diana Wallis (Yorkshire and the Humber).

euroVote: North East

Conservative

Martin Callanan MEP voted against SWPAT,
with Finnish conservatives.

Liberal Democrat

Fiona Hall replied with two paragraphs from the Senior Policy Officer's email seen in the North West, but also explained the current EU situation.
She wrote that the LibDem MEPs voted to restrict patents to new inventions "in line with the party policy of resisting the wider application of patents."
While true, the success of that vote would have blocked other good amendments.

euroVote: North West

Labour

Arlene McCarthy MEP is Labour's
"national brain" on software patents.
She gave a long and full reply and did note that:
"Opensource software must be allowed to flourish and the Commission
must ensure that this Directive does not have any adverse effect
on opensource software and small software developers."
[MJR note: opensource does not have a position on patents,
according to
the OSI FAQ,
so what does this mean?]

She is willing to use Parliament's power to reinstate amendments:
"If both the Council of Ministers and the European Commission refuse
to reinsert Parliament's amendments, there will be no Directive. Our
power on this piece of legislation is very strong we can modify it or
block it if we choose to do so."

However, she led the directive through parliament and
FFII really do not like her.
I suspect this is partly driven by support for EPO and UKPO
with phrases like
"The European Patent Office is issuing patents for software legally."

Gary Titley and Terry Wynn
referred the questions we asked them to Arlene McCarthy.
Brian Simpson did not answer in reasonable time.

Liberal Democrat

Chris Davies answered fully
and seemed knowledgeable about software patents.
He seemed in favour of patenting computer software,
but willing to vote for freedom of publication,
freedom of interoperation and
exclusion of data processing,
but it's unsure whether he would vote against a
directive without these.

The LibDem policy office also replied,
using the notorious Bromcom patent as an example.

Conservative

Sir Robert Atkins sent a Microsoft Word document reply
to an email:
"This builds on and clarifies the existing patent law across the European Union and makes it clear that only software which forms part of a technological process will be patentable"
and the "Directive originally proposed by the Commission set a fair test for software".
"We did, however, support a number of amendments to clarify the text and ensure that generic software patents were specifically excluded."

Den Dover, David Sumberg and Jacqueline Foster
did not answer some software patent questions in reasonable time.

euroVote: Northern Ireland

euroVote: East Midlands

Liberal Democrat

Nick Clegg MEP voted against IPRED,
in line with party policy.
He was not present for the SWPAT vote.

Conservative

Roger Helmer MEP referred questions asked of him on
behalf of an association to MEPs from the association's postal address,
and "national brain"Malcolm Harbour.
Neither answered.
His office offered to book appointments for constituents.
Call Sara on 01455 558447

Labour

Mel Read MEP
sent a slightly edited version of the party line
when questioned about the IPR Enforcement Directive and
expressed support for
"national brain"Arlene McCarthy.

euroVote: West Midlands

euroVote: Wales

Labour

Gareth S. Williams replied with "Please find attached a statement from Arlene McCarthy MEP on this. I would follow this position if elected to the European Parliament"

Liberal Democrat

Ali Goldsworthy replied
with an edited version of the policy office email seen by
Russell Phillips in the North West
and forwarded the enquiry to UK minister Lord Sainsbury.
She added a link to Richard Allan MP who
seems against software patents.

See Also

euroVote: Eastern

Liberal Democrat

Rosalind Gill replied that "I have concerns about the EU Directive on the Patentability of
Computer-Implemented Inventions [...]" and continued with an edited
version of the reply from the Lib Dem policy office seen
by Russell Phillips.

Andrew Duff MEP wrote "it may well be the case that allowing commercial control of these algorithmic building blocks and gateways creates the kind of monopolies that make a mockery of free and creative enterprise" when asked about the IPR Enforcement Directive.
His office replied with a Microsoft Word attachment when asked about software patents.

UKIP

Jeffrey Titford MEP's office promised they would do all they can to oppose the patenting of software ideas.

Conservative

Richard N (maybe Richard Normington?) sent a copy of the same reply as Sir Robert Atkins to software patent questions.

Labour

Their region sent a Microsoft Word attchment on the first reply to software patent questions.
A second, apparently new reply said
"Many small and medium-sized firms in the
East of England have told me of their concern that patenting will restrict
their ability to write new and better software without infringing the
rules. But, at the same time, SMEs will benefit if the proposed Directive
succeeds in establishing clear ground rules.
[...]
has been difficult to strike a balance between the need for license fees
on the one hand and the imperative for competition on the other. The
European software industry needs a better patent system than the out-dated
one we have now if it is to be helped to remain creative.
[...]
I will be working to ensure that nothing will be patentable in the future
that is not patentable now.."

Green

Campaign Co-ordinator John Matthissen replied and said they are
"opposed to the EU proposals on
software patenting, and supports open source operating systems such as
Linux. The GP also wishes to see an end to the effective Microsoft
monopoly in many software applications."

English Democrats

Their response didn't seem to have a party policy on this yet,
but asked for suggestions and will have
"a more detailed policy (if applicable) for the General Election".

ProLife

The ProLife Party have committed not to direct its members' votes on these issues (source: Russell Phillips, North-West).

Independents

Martin Bell replied that "I am generally in favour of the
little platoons over the big battalions. This will inform my attitude to the software patentability issue"

Liberal Democrat

Sarah Ludford MEP
replied nearly two months after being asked about
the IPR Enforcement Directive.
She voted against the AFFS suggestions,
according to the data on this site,
and defends the directive in her reply.
Some parts were unclear and clarification sought,
but there has been no reply yet.

Green

euroVote: South East

UKIP

Nigel Farage MEP's office said UKIP would do all they can to oppose further IPR enforcement measures which "is being proposed for the benefit of large, often multinational, companies and not for the benefit of smaller businesses or individuals".

Conservative

Roy Perry MEP's office sent the shortest reply from an MEP AFFS has ever had: "Thank you for your letter of the 4th March 2004 regarding the Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Directive. I am most grateful to you for taking the time to set out your Association's views on the matter and have noted your comments."
He went against the AFFS suggestions and voted for IPRED, according to the data we have.

Green

Caroline Lucas MEP voted against SWPAT.

ProLife

The ProLife Party have committed not to direct its members' votes on these issues (source: Russell Phillips, North-West).

Liberal Democrat

euroVote: credits

A full list of contributors and contributions will be kept here, as far as possible, as the project continues.
This is an essential part of the information, so that people can make their own mind up whether they want to trust us.

EUCD votes (datafile has mangled accented characters, different to other files here - can you correct it?)
- I believe those wanting to limit would vote +1,-1,-1,-1,-1,-1,-1,+1,-1 but
I'm not sure about the third, fourth and fifth of those.

SWPAT voting
- I believe FFII say those wanting to limit would have voted +1,+1,+1,+1,-1,-1,-1,+1,+1,+1,+1,-1,+1,-1,+1,+1,-1,-1,-1,-1
but I'm not sure about the last two

IPRED voting
- I believe those wanting to limit would vote +1,+1,+1,+1,+1,-1,-1
but I'm not sure about the last-but-one

euroVote: Site Copyright

Copyright 2004 MJ Ray. No warranty offered and no liability accepted. I grant permission to you to do any act with my contribution to this work, including making and distributing modified or unmodified copies. Please ask me to link to mirrors. Please link to this site and credit its contributors.